M8 motorway (general thread)

BluntGuy

Furet wrote: »

That is particularly annoying.

Indeed, and very easy to miss.

Me too - along with the bit betwixt Cahir and Kilbeheny, and with the R639 signage at New Inn getting blue M8 patches put up too. There is STILL orange N8 signage close to junction 10 on the old Cahir Bypass.

I've seen that as well - completely ridiculous. You would've thought somebody would notice when they were half-heartedly patching the signs at J10. Speaking of patching, I don't know if mentioned this before, but the other day, I got out of the car and inspected the signs there. I can't believe how atrociously patched they are. That junction honestly gets uglier every single time I use it.

I'd love to know the reason for the delay...it's taken a ridiculously long time. But I'd say the DoT is sick of me by now (though I've only called them 4 times since July last year).

Well I'm sick of the DoT. They provide no updates on their website, the NRA are keeping schtum, and God forbid the local councils know anything about the redesignations.

Amtmann

BluntGuy wrote: »

Speaking of patching, I don't know if mentioned this before, but the other day, I got out of the car and inspected the signs there. I can't believe how atrociously patched they are. That junction honestly gets uglier every single time I use it.

It's utterly vile. It's like a toxic waste dump, and I mean that. One of my other big things is environmental mitigation - when thousands of acres of meadow and hedgerow are destroyed to build a new road, you should counter that by planting generously along the motorway Glanmire Bypass style (the GB is a beautiful sight southbound these days, by the way). But the entrance to Cahir at junction 10 is revolting, and the signage, which is rubbish, compounds this. And what's totally sickening is that so many people just don't care. It's the typical "ah sure 'tis grand, 'twil do the job" type attitude. While I'm venting, I may as well say that I don't know why patching was used at junction 10. The patches are so large that given the awkwardness, it might have been cheaper to just replace the signs altogether.

Well I'm sick of the DoT. They provide no updates on their website, the NRA are keeping schtum, and God forbid the local councils know anything about the redesignations.

It's a chamber of secrets there. It's hardly sensitive information we're after, is it. Yet the evasion and coyness, and outright suspicion that you get from certain civs at the DoT is risible.

BluntGuy

Furet wrote: »

It's utterly vile. It's like a toxic waste dump, and I mean that. One of my other big things is environmental mitigation - when thousands of acres of meadow and hedgerow are destroyed to build a new road, you should counter that by planting generously along the motorway Glanmire Bypass style (the GB is a beautiful sight southbound these days, by the way). But the entrance to Cahir at junction 10 is revolting, and the signage, which is rubbish, compounds this. And what's totally sickening is that so many people just don't care. It's the typical "ah sure 'tis grand, 'twil do the job" type attitude. While I'm venting, I may as well say that I don't know why patching was used at junction 10. The patches are so large that given the awkwardness, it might have been cheaper to just replace the signs altogether.

My thoughts entirely. A horrendous entry to what is meant to be a heritage town. J11 isn't much better, but at least the signage isn't all over the place.

Those patches confuse me as well. They fail in pretty much every respect. They don't even completely cover the old writing beneath which leads me to believe that they weren't even measured properly. They were just carelessly slapped onto the existing signs giving them a replusive, clunky appearance.

And yes, in hindsight the signage should've been replaced because it fails to signify where the R639 continues. There is a whole bunch of signage around that junction that needs changing, but it's too much to get into now.

I don't even think it comes down to lack of funding. It's just plain carelessness and laziness. If Kilkenny Co. Council can replace the signage between Cashel-Cullahill within a matter of 4 or 5 months, why can't South Tipp Co. Council do it within a matter of nearly a year?

It's a chamber of secrets there. It's hardly sensitive information we're after, is it. Yet the evasion and coyness, and outright suspicion that you get from certain civs at the DoT is risible.

What annoys me most about the DoT with regard to these redesignations is this whole rubbish of "we're hoping to have it done by summer 2009". Now to me, that signifies that there isn't a coherent timescale or plan in place "Hoping" signfies a lack of confidence, as though they don't know themselves when it's going to come through.

It's a complete joke. The DoT should KNOW exactly when the S.I is going to come through. They should be able to break down exactly what the process is, and exactly how long each element of it will take. It's not as if this is the first time they've done this.

Instead, we get empty statements like that.

Chris_533976

Furet wrote: »

Incidentally, I completed walking the length of the M-F scheme the other day.

I wonder if you (or those cyclists) had GPS with them and were mapping for OSM. I'd be interested in seeing how quickly this appears

Hogzy

Chris_533976 wrote: »

I wonder if you (or those cyclists) had GPS with them and were mapping for OSM. I'd be interested in seeing how quickly this appears

Why would they get cyclists to do it, wouldnt they just drive instead?

DOS

I think that there will be a junction for the N8/M8 slightly north of the current roundabout on the LS KK border. There appears to be on/off ramps under construction at the bridge just in off the current N8.

Amtmann

DOS wrote: »

I think that there will be a junction for the N8/M8 slightly north of the current roundabout on the LS KK border. There appears to be on/off ramps under construction at the bridge just in off the current N8.

Ha! I was wondering whether to say that or not. I actually had a very good look at this a couple of weeks ago and that thought crossed my mind. It would also explain why that first overbridge is so massive. I might have a few photos of the potential ramps somewhere...I'll have a look and post them when I find them.
In all liklihood, though, it's not a junction. It's not in the EIS after all, and the ramp-like structures are probably intended for local agriculatural access.

Amtmann

Firstly, these images are dull as they were taken at dusk.


This shows a view of that first massive overbridge as one looks south at it from the north. If the ramp shown does indeed become a junction slip, then it will be a northbound onslip.

A closer look:


This would be the southbound offslip:



This shows the carriageway as you look north from the top of the overbridge - it's not really visible here, but the carriageway bulges on the left (i.e. the northbound carriageway) as if to accomodate a merging lane.

There are plenty of indications that this won't be a GSJ (such as the fact that signage at Urlingford clearly says 'toll' ahead, and that no GSJ is shown on the EIS), but it is possible that they are incorporating a redundant GSJ, so that they'll have the option of opening it in the future, much like the hidden junction on the Glanmire Bypass.

Amtmann

Hm; here it is on the EIS: -

http://www.m7m8scheme.ie/eis/pdfs/EIS_M7M8_Volume6_Fig3-21.pdf

What are those sliproads for??

Hogzy

I was just looking at this and thought to myself, if your heading north on the M8 and want to go west on the M7 what do you do?

Amtmann

You can't access the new M7 directly from the new M8. You'd have to leave the M8 at the proposed exit 3 and travel to the M7 across regional roads, or, alternatively, you would leave the M8 at junction 4 (Urlingford), carry on on the present N8 to Portlaoise and go to Limerick that way. It's very annoying in my opinion, but I suppose, in fairness, not much traffic on the M8 north of Cullahill would have Limerick as a destination.

Chris_533976

Hogzy wrote: »

Why would they get cyclists to do it, wouldnt they just drive instead?

Well since you cant drive on it yet, cyclists (who probably shouldnt be there anyway) could map it for OSM. Theres always a big race to see who can map a new road for OSM first, and if I was living there and cycled I'd have done it by now

murphaph

Furet wrote: »

Hm; here it is on the EIS: -

http://www.m7m8scheme.ie/eis/pdfs/EIS_M7M8_Volume6_Fig3-21.pdf

What are those sliproads for??

They don't appear to join the main carriageway and at the same time, they seem to go "up and over" the flyover whilst not touching the public road which also uses the flyover. I have 2 guesses
-simple farm flyover incorporated with a public road flyover. Farmer john can move machinery between fields each side of the flyover without interfering with or crossing over road traffic.

-a works/emergency services access to allow emergency/maintenance vehicles to U-turn safely. I don't believe it's a public slip road in either case.

Amtmann

I found this interesting brochure on Kilkenny County Council's website. It was released to mark the opening of the Cashel to Cullahill scheme: http://www.kilkennycoco.ie/resources/eng/Services/Roads/Roads%20Projects/m8Brochure.pdf

Some photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kilkenny/sets/72157611327783500/

Does anyone have any idea where this commemoration plaque is located? I've never seen it. Also, does anyone know where the plaque for the Cashel to Mitchelstown scheme is?

BluntGuy

Looks like they all had a wonderful day!

As for the brochure. I find it interesting that they chose a picture which clearly shows a lay-by of all things.

Anyway, page one was the just the same old rubbish from the usual suspects. Sicne when was the "old N8" a "network" - because according to Joe Crockett it is.

Page 2 was much better however, with some nice photos and some interesting facts. The picture of the M8 sweeping through the landscape reminded me of the M7. It looks majestic, even with the ugly barrier. I really wish we had more aerial shots of these schemes. I'd like to see what Cashel-Mitchelstown looks like from the air, and the Carlow Bypass.

Also, one million trees and shrubs planted?

Amtmann

BluntGuy wrote: »

Also, one million trees and shrubs planted?

Truly a great number have been planted, not all on the embankments. A very large mumber have been planted in a big hollow beside junction 6 for instance. This is visible on your right as you travel in the direction of the H&J restaurant from the J6 overbridge, or more easily on your left as you enter the M8 southbound from the junction 6 onslip. But 1 million seems a bit far fetched alright. The figure was probably derived by dividing the landscape plant budget by the average cost of each individual tree/shrub.

Also, has anyone seen that plaque, or the C-M plaque?

BluntGuy

Not sure if this was already posted, but I found a rather interesting quote from IrishTruckers.com regarding the Cullahill-Cashel scheme when it opened:

The new road is expected to be in operation by Monday next and it is anticipated that it will 160,000 vehicles from towns along the route.

Journalism at its very best.

Amtmann

Feckin eejits. I'm just trying to imagine what 160,000 vehicles would look like on Cashel to Cullahill!

BluntGuy

Oh, that site has plenty of gems:

http://www.irishtrucker.com/topics/roads/archive.asp

Subject to statutory approval it is hoped that construction work on the M20 could begin sometime in 2010 with a completion date in 2115.

:eek:

From tomorrow (Wednesday, September 24th), five existing routes will be upgraded to motorways leaving thousands of commuters having to look for an alternative route to travel.

Considering the alternative route is pretty much NEXT to the motorway, it isn't exactly much of a search.

Landowners living along the proposed route for a new superhighway between Cork and Limerick look likely to face significant disruption.

Hate that term.

Traffic congestion, slower journey times and disruption to bus routes can all be expected during the five years it will take to build the Metro North light rain system, an Environmental Impact Statement has warned.

And what do they mean by "an" - surely it's "the" EIS.

According to this, the M1 is to have 12 service areas at 60 km intervals...

Plans are in place to build at least a dozen of the service stations along the route at 60km intervals that will have all facilities needed.

Steviemak

Metro North Light Rain system???

Does anyone even check this stuff before printing

stock>

worked on cashel to cullahill:D:D

cantalach

Furet wrote: »

Feckin eejits. I'm just trying to imagine what 160,000 vehicles would look like on Cashel to Cullahill!

Dunno lads - it doesn't specify the time period. They presumably meant 160,000 per week.

serfboard

cantalach wrote: »

Dunno lads - it doesn't specify the time period. They presumably meant 160,000 per week.

But sure if you don't specify the time period any oul' boreen can be made to seem like it carries LOADS of vehicles.

"The road from Ballygoforwards to Ballygobackwards carries 500,000 vehicles".

Yeah, every 100 years, it does

D'Peoples Voice

serfboard wrote: »

But sure if you don't specify the time period any oul' boreen can be made to seem like it carries LOADS of vehicles.

"The road from Ballygoforwards to Ballygobackwards carries 500,000 vehicles".

Yeah, every 100 years, it does

Ahh, that might also explain West On Track suggested passenger figures for the Western Rail Corridor!:eek:

These errors suggest to me that the trucker website is updated by truckers on their laptops as they are driving along

emfifty

lads? can ye stick to the thread??!!:)

Hogzy

emfifty wrote: »

lads? can ye stick to the thread??!!:)

Silence Noobie, until you reach at least 100posts you have no say in ANY matter


Im joking for anyone who get offended:rolleyes:

cjmcork

Hi, anyone know when the Fermoy / Mitchelstown part of the M8 is opening - it's looking fairly done...............

larryone

Monday 25th

Colm R

When complete, what will the travel time be from Dunkettle to the exit at Cullahill?

Amtmann

Colm R wrote: »

When complete, what will the travel time be from Dunkettle to the exit at Cullahill?

Not sure Colm, but you can knock at least another 10 or 11 minutes off the current journey time.